MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117421023 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18065957

AERAC: An Identity Model

2025· preprint· en· W7117421023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Power and Status Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMohawk College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)AccountabilityIdentity formationSelfAgency (philosophy)Personal identityCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Psychology of self

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AERAC is a process-based identity framework that explains how personal identity forms, stabilizes, fractures, and recovers under relational and systemic pressure. Rather than treating identity as a fixed trait, narrative, or diagnosis, the model conceptualizes identity as a dynamic system maintained through ongoing interaction between internal structure and external response. AERAC identifies five interacting components—Anchor, Echo, Resonance, Agency, and Cognition—that together account for coherence, instability, resilience, and breakdown without reducing individuals to pathology or absolving them of responsibility . The model integrates internal continuity (Anchor), outward expression over time (Echo), environmental feedback (Resonance), choice under constraint (Agency), and meaning-making processes (Cognition) into a single functional loop. Identity coherence emerges when these components remain aligned and integrated; fragmentation occurs when one or more elements—most critically agency or cognition—are chronically disrupted. Importantly, AERAC treats resonance as morally neutral and emphasizes that silence, distortion, or incoherent feedback can be as destabilizing as overt rejection, particularly in contexts of chronic misrecognition or power asymmetry . AERAC preserves accountability without demonization by locating behavior at the level of agency while acknowledging the constraining effects of trauma, illness, and systemic pressure. This allows harmful behavior to be explained without excused, and suffering to be understood without collapsing into victimhood. The framework is applicable across psychology, trauma and recovery work, identity development, leadership studies, and the analysis of abusive or destabilizing relational and institutional environments, offering a non-pathologizing language for both breakdown and repair

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it